Reply With Quote
Are you going to post why the difference is so much? You do realize that benefits are included in these figures right? So they don't get paid twice more... why are you so dishonest?
http://www.usatoday.com/money/econom...pay10_ST_N.htm
At a time when workers' pay and benefits have stagnated, federal employees' average compensation has grown to more than double what private sector workers earn, a USA TODAY analysis finds.
Federal workers have been awarded bigger average pay and benefit increases than private employees for nine years in a row. The compensation gap between federal and private workers has doubled in the past decade.
Federal civil servants earned average pay and benefits of $123,049 in 2009 while private workers made $61,051 in total compensation, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The data are the latest available.
The federal compensation advantage has grown from $30,415 in 2000 to $61,998 last year.
Public employee unions say the compensation gap reflects the increasingly high level of skill and education required for most federal jobs and the government contracting out lower-paid jobs to the private sector in recent years.
"The data are not useful for a direct public-private pay comparison," says Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.
Chris Edwards, a budget analyst at the libertarian Cato Ins ute, thinks otherwise. "Can't we now all agree that federal workers are overpaid and do something about it?" he asks.
Last week, President Obama ordered a freeze on bonuses for 2,900 political appointees. For the rest of the 2-million-person federal workforce, Obama asked for a 1.4% across-the-board pay hike in 2011, the smallest in more than a decade. Federal workers also would qualify for seniority pay hikes.
Congressional Republicans want to cancel the across-the-board increase in 2011, which would save $2.2 billion.
"Americans are fed up with public employee pay scales far exceeding that in the private sector," says Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va., the second-ranking Republican in the House.
Sen. Ted Kaufman, D-Del., says a pay freeze would unfairly scapegoat federal workers without addressing real budget problems.
What the data show:
•Benefits. Federal workers received average benefits worth $41,791 in 2009. Most of this was the government's contribution to pensions. Employees contributed an additional $10,569.
•Pay. The average federal salary has grown 33% faster than inflation since 2000. USA TODAY reported in March that the federal government pays an average of 20% more than private firms for comparable occupations. The analysis did not consider differences in experience and education.
•Total compensation. Federal compensation has grown 36.9% since 2000 after adjusting for inflation, compared with 8.8% for private workers.
Are you going to post why the difference is so much? You do realize that benefits are included in these figures right? So they don't get paid twice more... why are you so dishonest?
Uh...the benefits are included in all the figures and 120k is 2x 60k.
Those bennies are pretty stinkin good too.
And the comparison is compensation, not pay.
Are benefits taxable?
/argument
They make more. A lot more.
But doesnt Obamacare make benefits taxable if you earn a certain amount?
Serious question.
Cutting benefits for federal employees is high on the list of things that need to happen to help bring the defecit under control.
What I get out of that article is that I need to get a Federal job ASAP...
Plz put in a good word for me. kthxbai.
If I'd only had a Fed. job for the past 20 years.
The Federal pension stuff is ridiculous. I knew an older guy a few years ago that was triple dipping...he did the minimum in the military, minimum in the civil service, and then went to the post office till retirement. He had three pensions.
What's outrageous is that private sector jobs have failed to keep up with the pay and benefits of federal sector jobs...
I can't remember exactly where I read/heard this, but I somewhere I came across a statistic about the percentage of federal employees who end up making more in pensions than they did actually working. I want to say it was something close to half.
The private sector probably could if it didn't have to pay so much for the public sector.
A lot of that stuff was negotiated when the economy was fine, and they just never cut back. Kinda what happened to Detroit in the private sector, until it exploded.
That's also why you see that kind of divergence. The private sector is much quicker to adjust to the economic realities.
This may not be the dumbest thing I've ever read on this board, but it's up there.
Fed employees only adjust when you get a politician that comes in with a plan to freeze and cut spending. We just haven't had one of those from either party for a while now.
I wonder how many public sector jobs will be added because of Obamacare?
Actually, there's a guy named Paul Ryan who wants to put a temporary freeze govt employee wages.
..then why have wages remained stagnant while productivity was increasing at a record pace just a couple months back? What you mean is that the private sector is quick to protect its bottom line by cutting pay and benefits for its employees but isn't so quick to raise pay or offer more benefits when times are good...
He also wants to cut the top tax rates. More of the same that got us here to begin with.
Who was the last President to leave office with not only a balanced budget, but a projected budget surplus on the books?
The private sector run things much more optimal, because they don't have the taxpayer's credit card to fall back to when the bottom falls out (unless you're a Wall Street mega-bank).
And how much they pay is eventually driven by supply and demand. When the economy is good, you normally see the opposite of what the OP points out. When there's high demand, a lot of people leave government work and move to the private sector.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
